Re: Storing Video's or vedio file in DB.
От
Jonathan Vanasco
Тема
Re: Storing Video's or vedio file in DB.
Дата
Msg-id
4683D2AC-7C10-4A5C-95D9-AF2BA8FE4265@2xlp.com
Ответ на
Storing Video's or vedio file in DB. (VENKTESH GUTTEDAR)
Список
Дерево обсуждения
Storing Video's or vedio file in DB. VENKTESH GUTTEDAR <venkteshguttedar@gmail.com>
Re: Storing Video's or vedio file in DB. Vincent Veyron <vv.lists@wanadoo.fr>
Re: Storing Video's or vedio file in DB. Jonathan Vanasco <postgres@2xlp.com>
Re: Storing Video's or vedio file in DB. Arthur Silva <arthurprs@gmail.com>
Re: Storing Video's or vedio file in DB. Adrian Klaver <adrian.klaver@aklaver.com>
Re: Storing Video's or vedio file in DB. Albe Laurenz <laurenz.albe@wien.gv.at>
Re: Storing Video's or vedio file in DB. Thomas Kellerer <spam_eater@gmx.net>
Re: Storing Video's or vedio file in DB. Alan Hodgson <ahodgson@simkin.ca>
Re: Storing Video's or vedio file in DB. Vincent Veyron <vv.lists@wanadoo.fr>
Re: Storing Video's or vedio file in DB. John R Pierce <pierce@hogranch.com>
Re: Storing Video's or vedio file in DB. Albe Laurenz <laurenz.albe@wien.gv.at>
Re: Storing Video's or vedio file in DB. Alban Hertroys <haramrae@gmail.com>
Re: Storing Video's or vedio file in DB. Merlin Moncure <mmoncure@gmail.com>
I wouldn't even store it on the filesystem if I could avoid that. Most people I know will assign the video a unique identifier (which is stored in the database) and then store the video file with a 3rd party (e.g. Amazon S3). 1. This is often cheaper. Videos take up a lot of disk space. Having to ensure 2-3 copies of a file as a failover is not fun. 2. It offloads work from internal servers. Why deal with connections that are serving a static file if you can avoid it? In terms of FS vs DB (aside from the open vs streaming which was already brought up) I think the big issue with storing large files in the database is the input/output connection. Postgres has a specified number of max connections available, and each one has some overhead to operate. Meanwhile, a server like nginx can handle 10k connections easily, and with little or no overhead. While the speed is comparable to the OS, you end up using a resource from a limited database connection pool. And you run the risk of a slow/dropped client tying up the connection. Why allocate a resource to these operations, when there are more lightweight alternatives that won't tie up a database connection ?
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления
От: David G Johnston
Дата:
От: Patrick Krecker
Дата: